Botany and Zoology. 337 
designated in an obscure work, out - the reach of the great 
majority of botanists. . ; a: slows ater number of Neck- 
Mieuticyion. them, and caerscen their cha ponent but even then 
it is doubtful whether these names should not bear the date, of the 
correction, ratber than of the original work. Adanson’s “ Fam 
illés,” with all the inconveniences of its form and sce orthine 
raphy, is much more scientific, and many of his genera are well 
a5 te nada have therefore been nese adopted.” é 
ere interject a practical application. There is an old 
and seolk established genus Smilacina o Desfontaines. Thereisa 
much older gen us Zovaria of Ruiz and Pavon, — in 1794, 
ew, fin oe that Necker has a Zovaria, cubliched 4 in 1790, and 
therefore four —— earlier sha that of Ruiz and Pavon, takes up 
this name in na, and e new name to be 
pla aves a 
made for the long-established homonymous genus. It will be said 
that the rule of priority demands the sacrifice, and that the iden- 
i et 
ree ean 
species of Convallaria which properly constitute ne 
Smilacina are referred to it pun name; and that, though it 
of summum jus summa injur the injurious consequence is a 
necessity. But Mr. Bentham’s Ob aiadisrienon of Necker’s work 
applies even to this instance, wice over Necker’s Zovaria is 
described as having a perianth of five sepals, and the berry is said 
to be one-celled. Desfontaines’ Smélacina, on the other hand, is 
correctly characterized. Moreover, if we do not neaates this 
na 
into this Ee oes Bu — remain nice seeiienk to caste with 
regard to the names and extent of the liliaceous genus. 
et ing an A was generally 
neglected by early botanists; but now, ever since DeCandolle 
a Elichr: i Helich 
a 
"S 
ue | 
e 
© 
B. 
ct 
Er 
oO 
iss) 
oom 
a 
<= 
= 
= 
al 
fo) 
has the effect of r ing so many generic names to a distant 
rt of all indexes, “alphabetical aaadanveh, etc. Admitting the 
propriety of adding the aspirate in new names, I had long declined 
